I am sure that there are a lot of my fellow MOC members that would like to be able to push for more “large rig friendly” campsites. To that end, I am asking if there is either a way directly on here to organize for same or is there another group that is actively involved in such?

Again this is not intended as a political post but it is a topic that has direct impact on most of our members. If there is any “cause” we should be actively pursuing with government officials, this one is at the top of my list. Granted we can take action individually but as a group we would get a LOT more attention!

Sad truth is the majority of state and federal/national park camp grounds were designed when 25’ was a big rig. Take Yellowstone or Grand Tetons for example, you are extremely limited in your options. The ability for campgrounds to handle rigs exceeding 35’ is certainly limited. Hopefully with the demand for RV parking in general we will see new facilities open up with expanded services, not only length, but room for slides, mid and rear septic dump receptacles, 50 amp services standard and working WiFi. On this last trip only stayed in one park where you weren’t six feet from your neighbor and had grass. Definitely a demand for not only more RV sites but a better quality standard as well. I won’t even consider a state park in my home state, most are inadequate and deplorable.

Sad truth is the majority of state and federal/national park camp grounds were designed when 25’ was a big rig. Take Yellowstone or Grand Tetons for example, you are extremely limited in your options. The ability for campgrounds to handle rigs exceeding 35’ is certainly limited. Hopefully with the demand for RV parking in general we will see new facilities open up with expanded services, not only length, but room for slides, mid and rear septic dump receptacles, 50 amp services standard and working WiFi. On this last trip only stayed in one park where you weren’t six feet from your neighbor and had grass. Definitely a demand for not only more RV sites but a better quality standard as well. I won’t even consider a state park in my home state, most are inadequate and deplorable.

I will say that most of the state parks in our area are very nice. It is the Federal parks that are lacking (although COE parks are gradually improving). The most resistance for change seems to be National Park Service. They seem to have an agenda that is diametrically opposed to big rigs

We have traveled over 100 K miles all over the country since 2006.Like others we call the campground tell them what we have and if they can accommodate us. Yes State and Federal C.G's are way behind but my guess it is a funding problem. We do not even consider State or Federal parks.

IMO there is not much we cab do at the State or Federal level. RV'ers are not that big of a group.

We have traveled over 100 K miles all over the country since 2006.Like others we call the campground tell them what we have and if they can accommodate us. Yes State and Federal C.G's are way behind but my guess it is a funding problem. We do not even consider State or Federal parks.

IMO there is not much we cab do at the State or Federal level. RV'ers are not that big of a group.

I respect that but we won’t know unless we try!! For sure as one person you don’t stand a chance!

There are some really good state and fairly good COE campgrounds in Arkansas so keep that in mind. With big exception to Catherine’s Landing at Hot Springs it is the privately owned campgrounds you have to be careful of. Although some of the COE and the NPS campgrounds are not big rig friendly. I don’t think it is so much a lack of funding as it is who sets and what are the priorities.......

I'll just add this: We have reservations at Golden Hill State Park on Lake Ontario in Western New York. When making my reservation I have to lie and say I'm only 40' instead of our actual 43'. But having stayed there before I know the sites we use can hold a 100' plus rig, so you have to wonder who measures these sites and sets the limits.

I am sure that there are a lot of my fellow MOC members that would like to be able to push for more “large rig friendly” campsites. To that end, I am asking if there is either a way directly on here to organize for same or is there another group that is actively involved in such?

Again this is not intended as a political post but it is a topic that has direct impact on most of our members. If there is any “cause” we should be actively pursuing with government officials, this one is at the top of my list. Granted we can take action individually but as a group we would get a LOT more attention!

Jim,

Sounds like this may be more of a local issue. We do not have the same issue in AZ and some of the other western states. Our private, state and federal facilities will take large rigs and we have hundreds of square miles of public lands with good boondocking if you need more room.

With more rigs on the road today, spaces in general are a little harder to schedule requiring more planning for either private or government sites.

As we travel we do see private parks expanding site sizes and upgrading 30 to 50A sites. Lots of them. Likely why we see nightly rates creeping up. Site size is not as difficult to deal with as internal roads within the park. Big dollars involved for all of that. We have also run across advertised big rig friendly Parks only to discover no tagalong or fifth Wheeler trash, or even Class Cs, allowed and they charge high rates to operate those parks. The good side for us, is every National Park we have visited, Yellowstone being an example, while none of the larger sites were often available within the park, there was a beautiful private park right outside the gate. County, COE, National Parks are generally cheaper than private parks. My view is that with the Federal Government facing an obscene budget deficit, campgrounds are not a high priority and expansion of capacity of Federal Campgrounds would result in rates being jacked up significantly to cover that effort, and rates end up higher than private parks.

I feel like the state parks, national parks will always be behind...but they serve a very important role in that they do attract the new to rving crowd that can not afford the private parks that we take with our larger, more expensive rigs. It is the private campgrounds that understand the money train that we represent and they are improving, renewing, and building resorts that continue to grow with us. We plan our six months "out of florida" travels five to six months ahead of time in order to get the nicer, larger sites and make do in some areas when we are towing to a given area or a resort that we want to spend more than a day or two at.

In Missouri, Kansas, and Oklahoma like DQDick and RKassl put forth … most state and even COE parks are in big financial trouble. Mowing and upkeep of the infrastructure are being cut back. Some lakes we visit that have been flooded out several times in the past 2-3 years have either not opened up all the sites again, not rebuilt the destroyed shower houses, or are thinking of closing the campgrounds all together simply because the funding is not there to keep fixing things. State Park on Tenkiller Lake, OK and Dam Site on Beaver Lake, AR are two examples. The bread and butter for many of the older campgrounds are the smaller weekend warriors and they like the amenities just fine. You have your point about change, but funding and low percentage of big rig RV's compared to weekend warriors accessing these sites will be a difficult hurdle to clear. jcurtis934 hits the nail on the head about what niche state and national parks serve.

My basic thought is that even a modest sized organized group could influence government decision makers and hopefully change their priorities. As they say “squeaky wheel gets the grease”.

I do take exception with the idea that only long term and full time campers own big rigs. I and at least two dozen of our regular camping friends are all weekend warriors and all own rigs over 38’ (about where I would think you can safely call big rig). While your right that there are a lot more of the smaller rigs owned by weekenders, I think you will find it is more a function of age of the owners in general. But then that itself is an assumption....

I think we need to take a breath and think about what State Parks and COE Parks are designed for. Camping!, and what most of us are now doing hardly resembles camping. We're not towing campers, we're towing mobile homes. Some people even seem insulted if you don't refer to their rig as a Coach! Now I'm not saying that I wouldn't like my rig to fit anywhere I want it to, but I'm not expecting the government to spend crazy money to accommodate a very small percentage of its patrons. I would however like to see a little common sense utilized when designing or remodeling facilities. How many times have you gone to a lake, and more than half of the sites don't have a lake view? How about the spindly tree or site number post that offers nothing other than to be an obstruction to your entry or ability to open your awning? Future trends in camping will influence decision making, and James' idea to make ourselves heard is not without merit, just don't expect to see much change. I would say that for the~$20 or 1/2 that with a pass we are still getting an exceptional entertainment value!

James … exception noted, but like you settled down to … in the COE and state parks … for every mammoth RV, there are 10 smaller ones paying the lion's share of the bills … at least in our travels.

I agree with that but it is in part due to the fact that the majority of the sites are not big rig friendly. When we visit RV parks that are truly big rig friendly the numbers flip flop. If the COE and State Parks were more big rig friendly I would suggest that the numbers of big rigs using same would also increase. And since big rigs are becoming more and more common there might as well be a push to make the parks accessible to all? After all we pay taxes too and frankly I suspect that big rig owners tend to be wealthier folks or at least older and have paid more than their fair share of taxes that are used in part to maintain/upgrade the parks.